2025 Toronto Blue Jays Season Thread

[bluejays]

To me if Bo is back and he's convinced he's good (assuming George cannot field), then you have to put Bo at 2nd. He cannot play SS.

[Cecil Terwilliger]

I prefer human calls. Especially if we’re gonna have to deal with this bull#### where if only a millimetre of the ball touched the strike zone it’s a strike.

I’m a big fan of the challenge system but I would change it so that your challenge is only successful if the entire ball is in the strike zone.

Sports are being ruined by instant replay. And the strike zone is far more subjective than in or out in tennis using Eagle eye. Where are the strike zone begins and ends for each player vertically is different. It’s so much harder to implement in baseball.

It only needs to be used in baseball for the most egregious ball/strike calls.

[Cecil Terwilliger]

Game 7 of the American League Championship Series between the Toronto Blue Jays and the Seattle Mariners delivered record-breaking viewership on Sportsnet and Sportsnet+, with an average of 6 million Canadians tuning in to watch Canada’s Team punch their ticket to the World Series. The previous high was Game 6 of the 2015 ALCS which averaged 5.1 million viewers.

Game 7 audiences peaked at 8.3 million around 11 p.m. ET when Jeff Hoffman struck out Julio Rodriguez for the game’s final out. Fans tuned in early with an average of 1.9 million watching Sportsnet’s broadcast team tee up history in the Blue Jays Central pregame. Plus, an average of 2.8 million fans stayed tuned into postgame to watch Vladimir Guerrero Jr. get crowned MVP of the series and pop champagne in the clubhouse.

https://about.rogers.com/news-ideas/...-on-sportsnet/

And I don’t believe that includes people in Canada who watched on Fox, which would be a not insignificant portion considering fox is part of basic cable and Sportsnet frequently is not.

[jayswin]

Originally Posted by Cecil Terwilliger

I prefer human calls. Especially if we’re gonna have to deal with this bull#### where if only a millimetre of the ball touched the strike zone it’s a strike.

I’m a big fan of the challenge system but I would change it so that your challenge is only successful if the entire ball is in the strike zone.

It only needs to be used in baseball for the most egregious ball/strike calls.

That seems silly to implement a challenge system that uses a completely different criteria for balls and strikes from umpires?

[Mathgod]

Originally Posted by Cecil Terwilliger

I prefer human calls. Especially if we’re gonna have to deal with this bull#### where if only a millimetre of the ball touched the strike zone it’s a strike.

I’m a big fan of the challenge system but I would change it so that your challenge is only successful if the entire ball is in the strike zone.

I... don't really see what you're trying to get at here.

A smaller strike zone where it's a strike if any part of the ball touches the zone is literally the same thing as a larger strike zone where the entire ball must be in the zone for it to be a strike. (Besides, we're in the same conundrum as before if a pitch is almost entirely in the zone but a millimetre of the ball is outside the zone.)

So really you're just having a debate on how large the strike zone should be, not whether humans do a better job of calling balls & strikes than technology.

Sports are being ruined by instant replay. And the strike zone is far more subjective than in or out in tennis using Eagle eye. Where are the strike zone begins and ends for each player vertically is different. It’s so much harder to implement in baseball.

Technology can easily account for the differences between batters.

I don't think sports are being ruined by instant replay. If anything, sports are being ruined by people who think there's a conspiracy against their team any time a ref blows a call. While we can't stop people from being overly conspiratorial, we can reduce human error in calls by implementing technology and reaping the benefits of increased accuracy.

It only needs to be used in baseball for the most egregious ball/strike calls.

If you can get accuracy of all calls to at or near 100%, I see no reason not to do it. And not just for egregious calls - all calls.

[Cecil Terwilliger]

Originally Posted by jayswin

That seems silly to implement a challenge system that uses a completely different criteria for balls and strikes from umpires?

Because umpires already have a job and we only want to catch the most egregious missed calls.

Part of the allure of baseball is the human element. I like it that sometimes a ball that catches the corner is a strike and sometimes it isn’t.

The strike zone is and always will be subjective. I am not a fan of any system that makes it completely objective.

[Cecil Terwilliger]

Originally Posted by Mathgod

I... don't really see what you're trying to get at here.

A smaller strike zone where it's a strike if any part of the ball touches the zone is literally the same thing as a larger strike zone where the entire ball must be in the zone for it to be a strike. (Besides, we're in the same conundrum as before if a pitch is almost entirely in the zone but a millimetre of the ball is outside the zone.)

So really you're just having a debate on how large the strike zone should be, not whether humans do a better job of calling balls & strikes than technology.



Technology can easily account for the differences between batters.

No I don’t think technology can easily count for the differences between batters. How can we define where somebody’s knees start with pinpoint accuracy if we’re gonna be calling balls and strikes based on millimeters. How are we gonna define what chest height is? Any system they come up with is gonna be just as subjective as the calls were already getting from umps.

The strike zone is better when it’s subjective. I only feel that there’s benefit in getting rid of the worst calls.

[ben voyonsdonc]

Originally Posted by Cecil Terwilliger

I prefer human calls. Especially if we’re gonna have to deal with this bull#### where if only a millimetre of the ball touched the strike zone it’s a strike.

I’m a big fan of the challenge system but I would change it so that your challenge is only successful if the entire ball is in the strike zone.

Sports are being ruined by instant replay. And the strike zone is far more subjective than in or out in tennis using Eagle eye. Where are the strike zone begins and ends for each player vertically is different. It’s so much harder to implement in baseball.

It only needs to be used in baseball for the most egregious ball/strike calls.

If the pitch even kisses the strike zone, it is, by definition, a strike. You just can’t have different standards for strikes - a strike is a strike is a strike. That is the purpose of reviewing the pitch.

Fundamentally balls and strikes aren’t judgment calls - much less so than some of the reviews in football. A pitch is either a strike or isn’t. The only reasons we don’t mandate full robo umps for balls and strikes are: keeping some tradition and the slowing down of the speed of the game.

[Roof-Daddy]

No way. The technology should be used to make all balls called balls and all strikes called strikes

I can't believe somebody would actually want human error to factor in at all. That's ridiculous

[Mccree]

Originally Posted by Mathgod

I... don't really see what you're trying to get at here.

A smaller strike zone where it's a strike if any part of the ball touches the zone is literally the same thing as a larger strike zone where the entire ball must be in the zone for it to be a strike. (Besides, we're in the same conundrum as before if a pitch is almost entirely in the zone but a millimetre of the ball is outside the zone.)

So really you're just having a debate on how large the strike zone should be, not whether humans do a better job of calling balls & strikes than technology.



Technology can easily account for the differences between batters.

I don't think sports are being ruined by instant replay. If anything, sports are being ruined by people who think there's a conspiracy against their team any time a ref blows a call. While we can't stop people from being overly conspiratorial, we can reduce human error in calls by implementing technology and reaping the benefits of increased accuracy.



If you can get accuracy of all calls to at or near 100%, I see no reason not to do it.

I think VAR in Soccer has taken a lot of the fun and passion out of scoring a goal due to the instant VAR check for a player 1mm offside.

Instant replay is great to correct crazy bad calls, not if a pitch is 1mm a strike or not or is a player is offside by 1mm or not.

[Mathgod]

Originally Posted by Mccree

I think VAR in Soccer has taken a lot of the fun and passion out of scoring a goal due to the instant VAR check for a player 1mm offside.

Instant replay is great to correct crazy bad calls, not if a pitch is 1mm a strike or not or is a player is offside by 1mm or not.

Hard disagree. If you want your goal to count, make sure you're not offside.

[Cecil Terwilliger]

Originally Posted by Roof-Daddy

No way. The technology should be used to make all balls called balls and all strikes called strikes

I can't believe somebody would actually want human error to factor in at all. That's ridiculous

How do you even know what’s a strike and what isn’t?

Do you know what the strike zone is for every single batter in Major league baseball? How could you possibly define that within millimeters?

No matter what they come up with it’s gonna be subjective. At least it’s gonna be equally ####ty for everyone.

[Mathgod]

Originally Posted by Cecil Terwilliger

How do you even know what’s a strike and what isn’t?

Do you know what the strike zone is for every single batter in Major league baseball? How could you possibly define that within millimeters?

No matter what they come up with it’s gonna be subjective. At least it’s gonna be equally ####ty for everyone.

I mean they don't change the net size in hockey if a goalie is smaller or larger. Maybe they could have one universal zone size for everyone.

But if the strike zone is going to be unique for each batter, there's a way to make that work too. Before each season, each player has their picture taken in front of a camera that is designed to figure out what that player's strike zone is.

You make it sound like this is some sort of daunting unsolvable problem, but it really isn't.

[ben voyonsdonc]

Originally Posted by Cecil Terwilliger

How do you even know what’s a strike and what isn’t?

Do you know what the strike zone is for every single batter in Major league baseball? How could you possibly define that within millimeters?

No matter what they come up with it’s gonna be subjective. At least it’s gonna be equally ####ty for everyone.

The strike zone used by the ABS system is player specific. Each player has a strike zone created by the system and that is what is used to judge balls and strikes. The zone isn’t the same one used for a guy like Kirk and Aaron Judge. It is quite precise. https://www.mlb.com/amp/news/abs-cha...-mlb-2026.html

[Roof-Daddy]

Originally Posted by Cecil Terwilliger

How do you even know what’s a strike and what isn’t?

Do you know what the strike zone is for every single batter in Major league baseball? How could you possibly define that within millimeters?

No matter what they come up with it’s gonna be subjective. At least it’s gonna be equally ####ty for everyone.

See below.

Originally Posted by ben voyonsdonc

The strike zone used by the ABS system is player specific. Each player has a strike zone created by the system and that is what is used to judge balls and strikes. The zone isn’t the same one used for a guy like Kirk and Aaron Judge. It is quite precise. https://www.mlb.com/amp/news/abs-cha...-mlb-2026.html

[Roof-Daddy]

The revenue being created by this run sure can't be hurting the projected Jays payroll for next season. I don't know if they were going to dial things back much anyways, but I'd imagine the Jays FO will have the resources to bring a couple big name starters and bats if they can entice any of them sign here. And enticing them to sign here will probably be a lot easier as well after this run.

[bluejays]

Originally Posted by Roof-Daddy

The revenue being created by this run sure can't be hurting the projected Jays payroll for next season. I don't know if they were going to dial things back much anyways, but I'd imagine the Jays FO will have the resources to bring a couple big name starters and bats if they can entice any of them sign here. And enticing them to sign here will probably be a lot easier as well after this run.

I don't think payroll will increase based on this run. They need to recoup money from the renovations. It'll be easier to bring in free agents though, no doubt.

[SuperMatt18]

Originally Posted by Roof-Daddy

The revenue being created by this run sure can't be hurting the projected Jays payroll for next season. I don't know if they were going to dial things back much anyways, but I'd imagine the Jays FO will have the resources to bring a couple big name starters and bats if they can entice any of them sign here. And enticing them to sign here will probably be a lot easier as well after this run.

Never hurts to have guys like Springer and Scherzer talking about how much they love the city, fans, and organization after a game like that when it comes to attracting free agents.

[Roof-Daddy]

Originally Posted by bluejays

I don't think payroll will increase based on this run. They need to recoup money from the renovations. It'll be easier to bring in free agents though, no doubt.

Maybe not, but even if it stays at around $280 million they have roughly $60 million to spend as it sits right now.

[Hemi-Cuda]

I love the fact that 30 years from now, if you utter the words Springer Dinger to any Canadian with a modicum of sports knowledge they'll know exactly what you're talking about